Shatter Me Wiki:Personal Attacks
Shatter Me Wiki's policy on personal attacks. = From Harry Potter Wiki:No personal attacks '' = category:policy Examples Are Personal Attacks: ''Note that these are only specific examples of personal attacks, many others exist. *Racial, sexual, homophobic, ageist, religious or ethnic epithets directed against another contributor. (Disagreement over what constitutes a religion, race, sexual preference, or ethnicity is not a legitimate excuse) *Using someone's affiliations as a means of dismissing or discrediting their views, regardless of whether said affiliations are mainstream or extreme. *Profanity directed against another contributor or a group. *Threats of legal action. *Threats of violence, including death threats. *Threats of vandalism to userpages or talk pages, or engaging in such vandalism to personally attack a user. *Posting a link to an external source that fits the commonly-accepted threshold for a personal attack. Suggesting a link applies to another editor, or that another editor needs to visit a certain link, that contains the substance of an attack. *Accusatory comments towards editors that can be considered personal attacks if said repeatedly, in bad faith, or with sufficient venom. *Negative personal comments and "I'm better than you" attacks, such as "You have no life." Are Not Personal Attacks: Users engaging in debate is an essential part of the culture of the Shatter Me Wiki. Assume good faith, be civil and adhere to good wiki etiquette when stating disagreements to avoid personalizing them and try to minimise unnecessarily antagonistic comments. Disagreements with other editors can be discussed without resorting to personal attacks. It is important not to personalize comments that are directed at content and actions, but it is equally important not to interpret such comments as personal attacks. Specific examples of comments that are not personal attacks include, but are not limited to: *Disagreements about content such as "Your statement about X'' is wrong" or "Your statement is a point of view, not fact" are not personal attacks. *Personal attacks do not include civil language used to describe an editor's actions, and when made without involving their personal character, should not be construed as personal attacks. Stating "Your statement is a personal attack..." is not itself a personal attack — it is a statement regarding the actions of the user, not a statement about the user. *A comment in an edit history such as "reverting vandalism" is not a personal attack. However, it is important to assume good faith when making such a comment — if the edit that is being reverted could be interpreted as a good-faith edit, then don't label it as vandalism. Alternatives *Discuss the facts and how to express them, not the attributes of the other party. This does ''not mean that you have to agree with the other person, but just agree to disagree. *Never suggest a view is invalid simply because of who its proponent is. *Explore issues in a less public forum like e-mail if a debate threatens to become personal. Resolutions If you are personally attacked, you should ask the attacker to stop and note this policy. If they continue, contact an ADMIN and clearly state the problem. In extreme cases, an attacker may be blocked under the "disruption" clause of the blocking policy, though the practice is almost always controversial. Personal attacks should be reported to an ADMIN. Equality There may be certain users who are unpopular, perhaps because of foolish or boorish behaviour in the past. Such users may have been subject to disciplinary actions by the . However, this is no excuse to engage in personal attacks against them. No personal attacks applies to everyone, including the administrators. Be Civil Maintain a civil atmosphere towards fellow users at all times, including in edit summaries (i.e. do not write''removing crap'', or undoing pointless info). Assume good faith, and remember that we were all new here at one time.